User:Marisajones/Evaluate an Article

Evaluate an article
This is where you will complete your article evaluation. Please use the template below to evaluate your selected article.


 * Name of article: Boston cream doughnut
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate: I chose this article because I love doughnuts and felt like this article's content could be improved upon.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? Yes.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? Yes.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? Yes.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? The Lead is very concise- this is a very brief article.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic? Yes.
 * Is the content up-to-date? Yes.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? There is no content that does not belong but there is content that could be added to make the article more informative.
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics? No it does not.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral? Yes.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? No.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? No.
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? No.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * Are the sources current?
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
 * Check a few links. Do they work?

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? The article is very clear and concise. I would describe it as well written, just needs more content.
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors? No.
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? Yes.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? Yes there are two images included in the article that I think give viewers a better idea of the doughnut.
 * Are images well-captioned? Yes
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations? Yes.
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way? Yes.

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic? The only conversations going on in the Talk page of this article are to state that the article is of low importance and a stub article.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? The article is rated as a stub-class and low importance.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class? We have not covered this topic in class.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status? The overall status of the article a stub- class and low importance.
 * What are the article's strengths? I think the article's strengths are the accurate and concise information included along with the guiding picture.
 * How can the article be improved? I think the article could be by adding more information and content on the Boston cream doughnut.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed? The article is very underdeveloped and needs more information from more credible sources.

Optional activity

 * Choose at least 1 question relevant to the article you're evaluating and leave your evaluation on the article's Talk page. Be sure to sign your feedback

with four tildes — ~


 * Link to feedback: